Originally Posted by Distracted1
I don't think so. I'm no lawyer, but my lay reading of Texas law regarding use of deadly force in self defense (linked below) makes me think it was still not justified.
For example,Texas has the condition that the actor must reasonably
believe deadly force was necessary. I think the prosecution will argue that she does not meet this standard, as she claims she could not even see him. The statute goes on to list other requirements, including specifically what must be met to be reasonable. She fails on each count to meet the standard. Even for the lamest of justifications, that of imminent intent to commit a robbery, I would expect the prosecution to argue that she had no actual reason to believe this. Suspicion, sure, but no more. And you can't pop a couple rounds based on suspicion.